Talk:Sarah Payne
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This is not a forum for discussing Sarah Payne, paedophilia etc.. Any such messages will be deleted. |
"Sarah Payne's oldest brother Lee became a father in May 2005."
Is this really relevant to the article? Richardbates2002
[edit] Merger
As per the merger I believe that Wikipedia is best served with two SEPERATE articles. R!ch 23:59, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
Updates: I have attempted to broaden the article with some more contextual material regarding the potential implications of "Sarah's law". I would tend to believe that we are best served by keeping the law article and crime article seperate, as we need to consider the law in an objective sense, and attaching laws, or even discussions laws, to a specific incident risks removing the debate from an objective to a subjective sphere.
--S ellinson 11:06, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
I've done a merger without deleting the original article, just to have a look how it would read. I feel that this merger is a good idea, and I leave it to someone else to either revert my changes or redirect the otehr article. - Moitio (talk) 22:17, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] About this article
There is no possible way that a sex offender lives within a mile of every person in Britain, what idiot made up that statistic?
- given that people in Britian Britain has a very high population density (one London Borough has a population density of over 15,000 people per square kilometer, and the city has an averge density of almost 4700 people per KM2), it might be close to the truth.
--perfectblue 15:35, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Repetition
The 'Subsequent Events' section says "The introuction of Sarah's Law is highly unlikely as it would breach the Data Protection Act and the Human Rights Act on the right to a private life." Which has already been included (with slightly better wording IMO) under 'Sarah's Law: Debate over Effectiveness', which is where I think it belongs. Any arguments against deleting the second mention?
